I think Mrs.Swan on Mad TV is just about all we can take of a funny talker. Then again, Mad TV seems to be headed to where SNL used to be a long time ago. -Wish I was around to see the “classics” first run. (Before 82)
Gah! Saturday Night Live is a nightmare. Nearly everyone on the current crop stinks. I can’t even make it through one skit on the show.
The worst part is that often the skits aren’t bad. They just go too long or the timing is off. It doesn’t help that they rely way too much on cue cards. It’s sooooo close to not sucking.
As someone who was around when SNL was new, let me let you in on a little secret.
Saturday Night Live never WAS all that good.
Oh, certainly it had its moments – most of which show up on the retrospectives, but overall they were famous for taking a sketch which would have been funny at five minutes, running with it for ten or twelve minutes, repeating essentially the exact same sketch half a dozen times a season, and then turning it inro a ninty-minute movie.
Frankly, it was only funny if you were stoned, as most of the audience (and damn near all of the cast) were at the time.
A book I just read this week gives a behind-the-scenes look at the show. It’s called Gasping For Airtime, written by Jay Mohr. He was on the show for two seasons.
I have ALWAYS agreed with this!
She is not funny and has a face made for radio if ya know what I mean. IT always seemed to me she must be a relative of Lorne or be blowing someone.
More than anything else from the '70s period, I miss the low-key skits, the mini-plays. I remember one with Bill Murray, Gilda Radner and Karl Malden. Murray and Radner are a married couple, staying at the house of Malden, her Dad. He comes to see them – really her – at bedtime. The gimmick is that he talks to her like Murray isn’t there and tells him to shut up whenever he says anything. It’s not funny like the Coneheads were funny but it makes for a nice change of pace. And there’s one with Burt Reynolds and Gilda Radner, an upwardly mobile couple wearing a matched pair of outfits, rehashing and fighting over every social cue that went wrong at a party they just attended. And a kind of “Jewish mother” skit with Jane Curtin and Gilda Radner. Why can’t they do anything like that any more? Why does it all have to be this goofy, surreal stuff that isn’t all that funny anyway?
I agree, although I was always sober (but tired) when watching the show. My theory is that people have selective memory of the earlier seasons. We tend to remember the highlights and forget that most of the ninety minutes sucked.
According to an article I once read in a reliable source like an in-flight magazine ;), the cast are actually not **allowed ** to memorize their lines. Because of problems with skits running too long, etc, the lines are often being re-written during the actual show, and people are supposed to say what’s currently on the teleprompter, not what they said in rehearsal.
I agree. I never enjoyed it. True, the Bad News Bees skit made me laugh (Killer Bees as the Bad News Bears) with “Tommy’s buzzing off” and “He has honey all over his stinger” but rarely were there any real laughs.
As someone else who was around when SNL was new, I’d have to disagree with this.
Sure there were bad skits, and even whole episodes that fell flat, but the fact that they were so much more experimental is what made it great.
Usually, I could stay entertained for the full 90 minutes (and no, I never watched it stoned or drunk).
In the first season or so, they did take the experiementation a bit too far at times. They needed to find their stride, but once that was hit, it took off.
(A case in point was one of the first few episodes had Paul Simon as guest host and there was very little comedy. It was almost all music).
I think being less formulaic would help. There’s nothing wrong with more music. Jack Black was a host a few years back and the show was very musical and even had a different musical guest (John Mayer). Several of the popstar hosts (eg Britney Spears) couldn’t carry the show on music alone, despite being terrible actors.
It seems to me that some skits reveal the funny in the first thirty seconds, and others wait until near the end to reveal the funny. It’s the latter skits that stay with me.
Think:
Happy Fun Ball
Richard Pryor’s Racist Interview (“DEAD honky!”)
The comic-timing time machine in the bathroom.
These all greatly amused me.
Skits where you learn the joke first thing in are much harder to pull off. Sure, there’s land-shark, but that seems to be an exception. Far too many of them just can’t sustain the initial joke.
That’s one thing I love about Kids in the Hall: each skit has a central joke, but likely as not they’ll twist it around on you halfway through.
Daniel
Another sad fact I realized after last week’s show is that the “commercials” now suck too. What the hell was that really unfunny old man giving bad investment advice? Good premise, horrific execution.
And I’m getting reeeeeeeally sick of Horatio Sanz breaking character and cracking up at himself. (c.f. Jimmy Fallon)
Does anyone know any more sophisiticated critical terms than “sucks”? Or have we all turned into potty-mouths?
Err…it bites ass?
At any rate, there’s been plenty of specific criticism of it, including in the first post. I don’t know what’s wrong with using “sucks” as a summary word.
Daniel
If we weren’t talking about low grade UN-sophisticated TV, yes.
How about a more up-to-date term than “potty mouth”?
What I hate about mostly all humor in the media today is that it’s based around laughing at stupidity - and that’s mostly it. Nothing more.
I don’t think stupid people are funny. I think stupid people are intolerable wastes of oxygen. I don’t like watching stupid people do stupid things and expect me to laugh at how stupid they are. I want to see real humor, not some dipshit actor making a fool out of himself pretending to be an idiot.
Maybe the problem is that no one is pretending, anymore.
Well, there’s always blows 
The fact that Leslie M. affectionately crowned me Gutter Gums in college is entirely beside the point.
Perhaps you can deign to grace the bourgeoisie with some suggestions? I can wait until you’re finished reading The New Yorker.
In other words — you can’t?